Pages

I couldn't find an official source, but I saw on a random message board post that the Zune gapless playback Just Works (tm), as opposed to the iPod gapless playback, which requires you to tag tracks as "gapless playback" tracks inside of iTunes (pain in the ass!)

Can any Zune owners confirm that gapless playback works, and works well (not just with MP3s encoded with certain encoders)?

GWJFFL Trophy Case:
Dynasty: 2012, 2013
Pro: 2013

Stele: "You're just afraid [Rat Boy]'s going to disappear for 2 years on us again"

Yeah, I reset/reformatted at 3.0, and I wasn't sure if it was 3.0 or the format that fixed all my problems, but they were fixed. Then I recently got some podcasts from iTunes(both on my "linked" PC and as a Guest on another PC) and it started again.

Do iPods have issues like this? What about "3rd party" MP3 players like Creative and others? If it wasn't for being able to send podcasts and songs back and forth with my wife, I'd dump the Zune in a heartbeat.

When it's good, it's very, very good. When it's bad, it makes me want to "forget" it outside in hopes that it might rain.

Steam: duckilama Battletag: DuckiLama#1806T.Rex is more impressive than a cockroach, but that doesn't mean it aged better. - CheezePavillion

True, but the minute you stop your subscription, you have no music.
Unless they've changed the ToS.

I'll never understand that argument. I pay for cable service every month so I can watch TV, and by that logic I shouldn't because if I stopped paying them I wouldn't be able to watch TV anymore.

It just requires a change in the way that you see "your" music. Your paying for access to the music, you're not buying it. Hence the very reasonable fee that comes along with the subscription. Not to mention if you really want to "keep" it there are plenty of ways to rip the drm out of it.

Yeah I love the all you can eat subscription option.. I do wish Apple would do something along those lines.. I'd drop my Zune in a heartbeat if they did that... that and if Apple would put a FM radio in at least one of their Ipods.

Aint nothing new about the world order..it's been playing since the day they put George Washington on a quarterDelivering Truth while the 10% deliver lies.

The subscription is a great option for discovery, and if you find something truly worth keeping, you can go and buy it. If I was really interested in discovering new music all that much, I'm sure I'd use the subscription too. As it stands, though, I know what I like, and if it's something too new, it has to grow on me. If I had the subscription, I'm not sure I'd give anything a chance to grow on me.

True, but the minute you stop your subscription, you have no music.
Unless they've changed the ToS.

I'll never understand that argument. I pay for cable service every month so I can watch TV, and by that logic I shouldn't because if I stopped paying them I wouldn't be able to watch TV anymore.

It just requires a change in the way that you see "your" music. Your paying for access to the music, you're not buying it. Hence the very reasonable fee that comes along with the subscription. Not to mention if you really want to "keep" it there are plenty of ways to rip the drm out of it.

It wasn't an argument.
I was pointing out a bit of the fine print that many people don't realize, or don't consider.
It's no different than XM/Sirius Radio, really, but it's a paradigm shift in paying for music that simply isn't good for every consumer.

I'm like nsmike. I know what I like.
For *****ME*****, the "all-you-can-download" subscription is a horrible deal, since I won't actually have any of that music after I cancel. I'd rather buy one CD in a year of something I know I like, than pay 12 times that and get to hear all the Britney/Christina/JLo ditties I can handle. (Yes, I know that's a gross mischaracterization. There's probably a lot of good High School Musical stuff coming out, too. I apologize. )

Additionally, I don't listen to nearly as much music as I do podcasts, anyway, and there's a metric asston of other ways to discover new music without paying the price of a CD per month without any long-term ownership(or rather, licenseeship) of the tunes I like.

But really, it was a simple "by the way, don't forget" statement. Not an argument against using the service. *This* post is the one you thought the other one was.

Steam: duckilama Battletag: DuckiLama#1806T.Rex is more impressive than a cockroach, but that doesn't mean it aged better. - CheezePavillion

The one that's always stumped me is how to get the software to download the most recent podcasts and yet get them to play in chronological order. Choosing chronological order seems to only make it download the oldest ones.

True, but the minute you stop your subscription, you have no music.
Unless they've changed the ToS.

I'll never understand that argument. I pay for cable service every month so I can watch TV, and by that logic I shouldn't because if I stopped paying them I wouldn't be able to watch TV anymore.

It just requires a change in the way that you see "your" music. Your paying for access to the music, you're not buying it. Hence the very reasonable fee that comes along with the subscription. Not to mention if you really want to "keep" it there are plenty of ways to rip the drm out of it.

Yes. But the cable argument does not work very well. Cable started off as being able to receive TV signal not matter what area (Downtown city or countryside) you lived in. Commercials were nearly non-existent. Then as cable penetrated the market in a big way in the 80's; cable channels and companies became networks unto themselves.

But, you can watch TV OTA with an antenna and eventually a digital converter box. The only thing limiting you is your choice of channels available to you.

But you are correct in far as access goes for music. But you do not own the music. And historically music was always sold to the consumer whether on wax cylinders, vinyl records, tapes (8tr, r2r or cassette) or CDs. Even radio is ad-supported, so you are paying for it, by listening to it. And sure your correct it can be cheaper, if the library your music service you have is the music you like. But at the end of the day (at the end of contract)- you have nothing to show for it.

Well... Actually, the cable point is the only one that can really be made. Yep, you can still watch cable OTA, and I've still got an FM tuner that works great. But if I want to choose which channels I have, then I must pay the cable company.

And the subscription option does not limit you any more than any other service does. You still have the same option of paying a dollar and getting a copy of a song to "keep". Personally, I don't see the point, but I know there are people out there who just like to "own" their music. My position was never to say anyone was wrong for wanting to go that route. I was simply pointing out the fallacies in assuming a general negativity surrounding the subscription method.